Equipment DSLRs for dolls, entry-level vs pro, what do you really need?

A Note About Brands
While the specific cameras in this comparison are Canon, because that's what I own, everything shown here is mostly true for the Nikon lineup, although Canon's cheapest is a little cheaper than Nikon's cheapest offerings at the moment.

Any DSLR is a big step up in flexibility and quality from smart phones
Right now, I believe that an entry-level DSLR from either Canon or Nikon is the cheapest path to high-quality portraiture-style doll photography, and the best option for someone looking to upgrade from using a cellphone or a point and shoot. Smart phones and P&S cameras--while providing decent image quality--don't allow for shallow depth-of-field shots, low-noise long exposures or low-light photography, or the fine control over focus that you get with a dedicated camera.

The cheap vs not-so-cheap DSLR performance gap
The good news is that the performance gap between what a few hundred dollars gets you compared to a few thousand has closed considerably in the past 5 years. It is a great time to be a digital photographer! The state of things is especially good for doll photographers, since non-moving subjects are the least technically demanding. One does not need 100+ cross-type autofocus points or 14 frames per second to shoot dolls that aren't moving.

What I got and what I'm comparing it to
The camera I purchased last week is a Canon SL1, known also as the 100D and Kiss X7 in various other parts of the world. I got it as a "refurbished" kit with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom lens for $329.99. I put "refurbished" in quotes, because it's a not-so-secret secret that most of what Canon and Nikon sell as refurbished goods are actually new overstock. My SL1 came with a shutter count of 44, which is Canon's QA taking test shots, it was very clearly not a used camera.

A lens like the 18-55mm kit lens is good for landscapes, but can't achieve a shallow enough depth-of-field for typical portrait style subject isolation, so I replaced it with a 50mm f/1.8 STM prime lens, an additional $89.79 expense (an absolute steal). All together, this little 18MP DSLR setup cost about $420. There was also one cheaper option, the T5 for just $249, which has the same sensor as the SL1 but in a larger body, but I was going for small size.


Canon refurbished site shown above: Canon Refurbished EOS Cameras

Nikon also has a refurbished store, but it does not usually have their lowest-end models. The new Nikon entry point appears to be the D3200 kit, currently $446.95 at B&H photo. They have them used too, from $329.95. FWIW, my experience with their used gear is that stuff graded 9 or higher is indistinguishable from new.Nikon D3200 at B&H

The Canon SL1 is indeed seriously small. Here it is with its 50mm f/1.8 lens, flanked by my regular size DSLRs (which also have portrait-orientation grips on them):


Cameras by abs plastic, on Flickr

But enough about what the low-cost options are, how well do they actually work? Bloody well as it turns out! Pressures on the old establishment (Canon and Nikon) from Sony and Fuji have made both Canon and Nikon step up their entry-level camera game, with kit lenses and cheap primes available now that hold their own against the top-level gear, no exaggeration. Canon's latest "nifty fifty" variant, the 50mm f/1.8 STM, is well built (unlike its predecessor), has a silent and fast motor, and sports 7 curved aperture blades like a pro-level lens, so no more ugly pentagon bokeh shapes if you use it wide open. It's a bit soft wide open, but by f/2.5 it's razor sharp across the entire field, and it can be had for $89.

The comparisons for real now
This is a shot I took of Iplehouse Bianca on a rock by the ocean, using Canon's top-of-the-line studio camera, the 50.6 megapixel 5DS R, and the 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens, and again with the Rebel SL1. The 5D setup costs a bit more than the SL1 (a bit more than 15 of them in fact) and also weighs 11 times as much. Of course it looks way more badass though, so you would expect it to be worlds better, right? Well, have a look:

The 5DS R + 85L shot. You're going to need to click through to Flickr to truly appreciate the difference (or lack of) in these two comparison shots that follow:

Comparison: Canon 5DS R + 85L II by abs plastic, on Flickr

The SL1 + 50 STM shot:

Comparison: Canon SL1 (100D) + 50 STM by abs plastic, on Flickr

Night and day difference, right? LOL, not really. There are definitely advantages with the higher-end cameras, but for doll photography presented at this final image size, they have more to do with getting the shots more easily and quickly, than with how the final image looks.

While those comparison images were shrunk from their original 18MP and 50MP sizes down to 6MP for Flickr you might be wondering if there is a huge difference if you were to instead use a tight crop, or look at the images at actual size. Again, there isn't so much. The 5DS R shot has more detail because of the sheer number of pixels, but it's kind of an oddball camera, the standard 5D mk III has 24MP, so it's much closer to the SL1 pixel dimensions. But even the difference between 18MP and 50MP is probably not as great as you might expect. Here are 1:1 crops of the above images (3000 x 2000 pixel images cut from the center of each shot, with no resampling).

Again, you need to click through to Flickr and zoom in if you want to see the actual 1:1 level images, these are 800 pixel Flickr-generated copies you're seeing in this post.

The 5DS R crop:

1:1 Crop Canon 5DS R by abs plastic, on Flickr

The SL1 crop:

1:1 Crop Canon SL1 by abs plastic, on Flickr

The photo above was shot with each of the respective lenses stopped down a bit, which levels the playing field between the APS-C sensor camera and full-frame sensor camera in terms of depth-of-field. One reason people move to a full-frame body is for shallower depth of field shots. But exactly how much more shallow do things get? I'm glad you asked :-) Here is an example. The lighting is a bit different in these side by side shots, because of different flashes, but the comparison is to show the amount and quality of the out-of-focus backgrounds:

Camera Minimum Depth of Field Comparison by abs plastic, on Flickr

So here you can see a difference between the cameras, and it is due to the sensor size and the fact that the full-frame camera is using an exceptionally fast piece of glass. In some scenarios the difference will be moderate, as shown here, and in setups where the subject-to-camera distance is very small, it will be more pronounced. With a shot such as this, where the subject is very well isolated by contrast and shape, it's also very easy to exaggerate the blur in Photoshop with the lens blur filter and a simple depth mask, if you want a more shallow look.

I don't want to give the impression that there is never a need to buy a nicer camera, or that you don't get much more for money, it's just that for hobby doll photography in particular the returns diminish very quickly. What you get in higher-end cameras is a more accurate and fast autofocus system, which becomes very important when you have a moving subject like a real person or animal, better build quality and weatherproof stuff, lower-noise images in low-light shooting or long-exposure shots, and features like dual memory card slots (essential redundancy for the likes of professional wedding and event photographers, but not needed by hobbyists). If you are looking at possibly getting a mid-range to high-end DSLR, it is likely the other things you want to shoot that will determine your gear needs. I have the 5DS R for my real people photography (Adam Smith (@adam.smith.photo) • Instagram photos and videos), not for the dolls.

 

The 50 STM has a very recessed front element, so a hood is not strictly necessary in most cases. If you add any kind of filter to it, and are shooting in direct sun, you may find the hood becomes necessary because having a glass filter on the front of the lens can introduce flare. UV and clear protection filters (especially cheap ones on telephoto lenses) can introduce flare and ghosting problems, and the only time I use them is when there is risk of water spraying the lens. Otherwise, I use hoods for protecting the front lens element.